Vikings Message Board.Com

IIsweet wrote:Again, just a thought. I highly doubt that they do something like this, but it was a fun 3 minutes that I thought about it.

The next part of that was the trade up for WR Treadwell.
To me, that could be a real opportunity there.

I really like Treadwell also!

After lurking in this thread, I spent portions of last night's game focused on Mike Harris at RG. I was pretty impressed with him. He generated movement in the running game and handled Mike Daniels, who is a pretty stellar interior DL. I can't claim to have watched him closely before last night, but it was a positive performance in my book. At just barely 27 with this being his first season at RG, you'd think there would be room for growth there on a team that needs good, young OL.

Banquo wrote:After lurking in this thread, I spent portions of last night's game focused on Mike Harris at RG. I was pretty impressed with him. He generated movement in the running game and handled Mike Daniels, who is a pretty stellar interior DL. I can't claim to have watched him closely before last night, but it was a positive performance in my book. At just barely 27 with this being his first season at RG, you'd think there would be room for growth there on a team that needs good, young OL.

He's been pleasantly not awful. I still think they need to aim higher at the position but I wouldn't mind if they re-signed Harris as a backup. He's proven versatile and competent enough to be relied upon as a backup guard/right tackle. I wouldn't be opposed if they made some moves in free agency/draft and let Harris compete to start if he can prove he's the best of the guys on the roster. He was rough early on but hasn't been a complete liability when considering the season as a whole. It is interesting to think about Harris and Loadholt together. That's 683 pounds of meat on the right side of the line.

dead_poet wrote: He's been pleasantly not awful. I still think they need to aim higher at the position but I wouldn't mind if they re-signed Harris as a backup. He's proven versatile and competent enough to be relied upon as a backup guard/right tackle. I wouldn't be opposed if they made some moves in free agency/draft and let Harris compete to start if he can prove he's the best of the guys on the roster. He was rough early on but hasn't been a complete liability when considering the season as a whole. It is interesting to think about Harris and Loadholt together. That's 683 pounds of meat on the right side of the line.

After watching the Chargers all season, he looks pretty good. Lol. I can see aiming higher, but you wouldn't want to low ball him to the point that he goes elsewhere and you're left with one fewer viable offensive lineman. There's a strong market out there for even guys who are merely solid on the offensive line. Because the Vikes can afford it, I'd lean towards offer borderline starter money and letting him compete. Maybe offer a deal with incentives.

James Conner has Hodgkin's Lymphoma. Won't be in draft.
We need a tackle more than any other position, we should draft that in the first round. Conklin is who is most realistic, since neither Stanley or Tunsil will fall to us.

Banquo wrote:After lurking in this thread, I spent portions of last night's game focused on Mike Harris at RG. I was pretty impressed with him. He generated movement in the running game and handled Mike Daniels, who is a pretty stellar interior DL. I can't claim to have watched him closely before last night, but it was a positive performance in my book. At just barely 27 with this being his first season at RG, you'd think there would be room for growth there on a team that needs good, young OL.

Yep Harris and Berger are the lone bright spots on the line this year, Berger's a bit long in the tooth but they should do what they can to keep harris. He also grades out very well with PFF which is a massive plus for me, they usually do a great job telling you who's actually playing well and who's to blame for when things go wrong.

I'd resign harris and move Fusco back to RG, I think moving Fusco to LG is a proven mistake at this point, if he can be serviceable again at RG that position is locked down between him and Harris.

With Clemmings and Loadholt at RT I think that position is set as well, Clemmings is getting some big time experience here being thrown to the wolves and can man that position until Phil gets healthy.

LT needs an upgrade, I love Kalil, I loved when we picked him but for whatever reason, the dude is not very good anymore. It's kind of sad because this has been one of his better years and yet his getting beat for 2 game ending strip sacks and a number of other crucial times probably cost us a 1st round bye in the playoffs.

It depends on how FA goes but if we can't sign a LT, LG, and C I'm drafting all 3 positions early.

mondry wrote: Yep Harris and Berger are the lone bright spots on the line this year, Berger's a bit long in the tooth but they should do what they can to keep harris. He also grades out very well with PFF which is a massive plus for me, they usually do a great job telling you who's actually playing well and who's to blame for when things go wrong.

I like PFF's advanced metrics (run stop %, pass rush productivity, etc), but I find their system for arriving at grades to be pretty flawed. Not that I think they're always wrong. In reality, I agree with their grades more often than I don't. But there are enough discrepancies that I don't quite trust them. Too often I've watched players perform well and come up with a negative grade and vice versa. My sense is that they're more amateur than they let on.

mondry wrote: Yep Harris and Berger are the lone bright spots on the line this year, Berger's a bit long in the tooth but they should do what they can to keep harris. He also grades out very well with PFF which is a massive plus for me, they usually do a great job telling you who's actually playing well and who's to blame for when things go wrong.

I'd resign harris and move Fusco back to RG, I think moving Fusco to LG is a proven mistake at this point, if he can be serviceable again at RG that position is locked down between him and Harris.

With Clemmings and Loadholt at RT I think that position is set as well, Clemmings is getting some big time experience here being thrown to the wolves and can man that position until Phil gets healthy.

LT needs an upgrade, I love Kalil, I loved when we picked him but for whatever reason, the dude is not very good anymore. It's kind of sad because this has been one of his better years and yet his getting beat for 2 game ending strip sacks and a number of other crucial times probably cost us a 1st round bye in the playoffs.

It depends on how FA goes but if we can't sign a LT, LG, and C I'm drafting all 3 positions early.

Though he was raw, I was pretty high on Clemmings at Pitt. Especially as a run blocker. I know he's been rough, but I do think he could have a bright future at RT. If Loadholt could come back for a season or two, they could continue to groom Clemmings for the future.

One option for the LT situation as a band-aid is Andrew Whitworth. He's still a high quality player there, and there's some connection as Zimmer came over from the Bengals. His age should keep the cost and length of contract down. He could be an ideal target as a stop-gap should they cut Kalil, or as insurance should they keep Kalil and it doesn't work out.

Banquo wrote:Though he was raw, I was pretty high on Clemmings at Pitt. Especially as a run blocker. I know he's been rough, but I do think he could have a bright future at RT. If Loadholt could come back for a season or two, they could continue to groom Clemmings for the future.

Yeah, I don't think anyone is asking to give up on Clemmings but he played like a very raw rookie. Hopefully Davidson can coach him up into an eventual serviceable starter. This was particularly enjoyable block (with someone mentioning the block resembled Liu Kang from Mortal Combat)

One option for the LT situation as a band-aid is Andrew Whitworth. He's still a high quality player there, and there's some connection as Zimmer came over from the Bengals. His age should keep the cost and length of contract down. He could be an ideal target as a stop-gap should they cut Kalil, or as insurance should they keep Kalil and it doesn't work out.

Except he signed a two-year extension back in September (I was hoping for him, too). I'm looking hard at Kelechi Osemele at LG. Cordy Glenn is a possibility at LT but he'll be pricey and I assume that would mean releasing Kalil outright, which I doubt is going to happen. Kelvin Beachum is another option (coming off an ACL tear though) but I just don't think they're going to sign starting OT in free agency unless they're done with Kalil.

LMAO at that Vine. That was a fun block to watch.

And actually, Clemmings had a good block on Matthews on Peterson's TD run as well. Maybe we have to have Clemmings block Matthews exclusively from now on

dead_poet wrote: Yeah, I don't think anyone is asking to give up on Clemmings but he played like a very raw rookie. Hopefully Davidson can coach him up into an eventual serviceable starter. This was particularly enjoyable block (with someone mentioning the block resembled Liu Kang from Mortal Combat)
Except he signed a two-year extension back in September (I was hoping for him, too). I'm looking hard at Kelechi Osemele at LG. Cordy Glenn is a possibility at LT but he'll be pricey and I assume that would mean releasing Kalil outright, which I doubt is going to happen. Kelvin Beachum is another option (coming off an ACL tear though) but I just don't think they're going to sign starting OT in free agency unless they're done with Kalil.

I didn't know that about Whitworth. Bummer. Donald Penn is another older guy who might serve as insurance.

dead_poet wrote: He's been pleasantly not awful. I still think they need to aim higher at the position but I wouldn't mind if they re-signed Harris as a backup. He's proven versatile and competent enough to be relied upon as a backup guard/right tackle. I wouldn't be opposed if they made some moves in free agency/draft and let Harris compete to start if he can prove he's the best of the guys on the roster. He was rough early on but hasn't been a complete liability when considering the season as a whole. It is interesting to think about Harris and Loadholt together. That's 683 pounds of meat on the right side of the line.

He wasn't rough early on. He was grading out highly on PFF early in the season as well. It's been a pretty consistent thing with him. He graded out around +3.0 - +4.0 against SF which was first game of the season

Pondering Her Percy wrote: He wasn't rough early on. He was grading out highly on PFF early in the season as well. It's been a pretty consistent thing with him. He graded out around +3.0 - +4.0 against SF which was first game of the season

I remain a little skeptical just because I've seen guys have great games and receiver poor grades and vice versa every so often. I think their grades are a good indication of who to look at, but sometimes they're pretty far off.

For instance Aaron Rodgers went 24/35 for 333 yards, 5 TD, and 0 INT against the Chiefs in week 3 and, if memory serves, received a negative grade for that game.

None of that is to say that they're always wrong, or even mostly wrong. But I do think you have to see for yourself to confirm. They don't settle it. Which it sounds like you have with Harris and that's great. I thought he looked good last night.

Banquo wrote:
For instance Aaron Rodgers went 24/35 for 333 yards, 5 TD, and 0 INT against the Chiefs in week 3 and, if memory serves, received a negative grade for that game.

It all has to be taken in context, they look at each play and if there's a guy wide open 30 yards down the field he loses points for taking a 6 yard check down for example. If you leave yardage on the field it hurts you, even if 24/35 for 333 and 5 TD's is still damn good, it's saying he could have had like 27/35 for 385 and 6 td's.

Are you sure he had a negative grade though? That does seem a bit silly!!

Banquo wrote: I remain a little skeptical just because I've seen guys have great games and receiver poor grades and vice versa every so often. I think their grades are a good indication of who to look at, but sometimes they're pretty far off.

For instance Aaron Rodgers went 24/35 for 333 yards, 5 TD, and 0 INT against the Chiefs in week 3 and, if memory serves, received a negative grade for that game.

None of that is to say that they're always wrong, or even mostly wrong. But I do think you have to see for yourself to confirm. They don't settle it. Which it sounds like you have with Harris and that's great. I thought he looked good last night.

Rodgers had a negative grade after that performance??!!! Maybe the guys that run PFF are Vikings fans